Connect with us

Business

Intuit Reports Second Quarter Results and Reiterates Full Year Guidance; Small Business Online Ecosystem Revenue Grew 22 Percent

becker blake

Published

on

Intuit Reports Second Quarter Results and Reiterates Full Year Guidance; Small Business Online Ecosystem Revenue Grew 22 Percent

Intuit Inc. (Nasdaq: INTU), maker of TurboTax, QuickBooks, Credit Karma and Mint, announced financial results for the second quarter of fiscal 2021, which ended Jan. 31.

“We continue to see strong momentum and accelerating innovation across the company with our A.I.-driven expert platform strategy,” said Sasan Goodarzi, Intuit’s chief executive officer. “Small Business and Self-Employed Group delivered double-digit revenue growth and Credit Karma performed very well since we completed the acquisition in December. We are encouraged by our early results this tax season, and we are confident in our game plan to win.”

Financial Highlights

For the second quarter, Intuit reported:

  • Total revenue of $1.6 billion, down 7 percent.
  • Small Business and Self-Employed Group revenue up 11 percent to $1.1 billion, while Online Ecosystem revenue grew 22 percent to $644 million.
  • Credit Karma revenue of $144 million since the acquisition closed on Dec. 3.
  • Consumer Group revenue declined 71 percent to $147 million, driven by the later IRS opening this year. The IRS began accepting and processing returns starting Feb. 12, compared to Jan. 27 last year.

Unless otherwise noted, all growth rates refer to the current period versus the comparable prior-year period, and the business metrics and associated growth rates refer to worldwide business metrics.

Snapshot of Second-quarter Results

GAAP Non-GAAP
Q2
FY21
Q2
FY20
Change Q2
FY21
Q2
FY20
Change
Revenue $1,576 $1,696 (7)% $1,576 $1,696 (7)%
Operating Income (Loss) $(25) $270 NM $235 $384 (39)%
Earnings Per Share $0.07 $0.91 (92)% $0.68 $1.16 (41)%
NM = Not Meaningful
Dollars are in millions, except earnings per share. Q2 FY’21 GAAP results include a $30 million gain from the sale of a note receivable that was previously written off. See “About Non-GAAP Financial Measures” below for more information regarding financial measures not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

Business Segment Results

Small Business and Self-Employed Group

  • Grew QuickBooks Online Accounting revenue 22 percent in the quarter, driven primarily by customer growth and mix-shift.
  • Increased Online Services revenue 20 percent, driven by QuickBooks Online payments and QuickBooks Online payroll.
  • Grew total international online revenue 44 percent.

Credit Karma

  • Combined income data from 26 million TurboTax returns with Credit Karma, with customer consent. The combination of verified income data with credit history will enable Credit Karma to better personalize offers for members.
  • Integrated Credit Karma Money into the TurboTax filing experience.

Consumer and ProConnect Groups

  • Launched TurboTax Live Full-Service, offering customers the ability to have an expert prepare and file their tax return for them.
  • Reported $207 million of professional tax revenue in the ProConnect Group for the second quarter, down 8 percent, reflecting delayed forms availability.

Capital Allocation Summary

In the second quarter the company:

  • Recorded total cash and investments balance of approximately $2.7 billion as of Jan. 31.
  • Repurchased $175 million of shares, with $2.2 billion remaining on the company’s authorization.
  • Received Board approval for a quarterly dividend of $0.59 per share, payable April 19, 2021. This represents an 11 percent increase compared to the same period last year.

Forward-looking Guidance

Intuit announced guidance for the third quarter of fiscal year 2021, which ends April 30. The company expects:

  • Revenue growth of approximately 53 to 55 percent.
  • GAAP earnings per share of $5.85 to $5.95.
  • Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share of $6.75 to $6.85.

Intuit also reiterated guidance for full fiscal year 2021. The company expects:

  • Revenue of $8.810 billion to $8.995 billion, growth of approximately 15 to 17 percent.
  • GAAP operating income of $1.920 billion to $1.990 billion, a decline of approximately 9 to 12 percent.
  • Non-GAAP operating income of $2.975 billion to $3.045 billion, growth of approximately 12 to 14 percent.
  • GAAP diluted earnings per share of $5.30 to $5.50, a decline of approximately 21 to 23 percent.
  • Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share of $8.20 to $8.40, growth of approximately 4 to 7 percent.

Conference Call Details

Intuit executives will discuss the financial results on a conference call at 1:30 p.m. Pacific time on Feb. 23. To hear the call, dial 866-417-5279 in the United States or 409-937-8904 from international locations. No reservation or access code is needed. The conference call can also be heard live at http://investors.intuit.com/Events/default.aspx. Prepared remarks for the call will be available on Intuit’s website after the call ends.

Replay Information

A replay of the conference call will be available for one week by calling 855-859-2056, or 404-537-3406 from international locations. The access code for this call is 9559195. The audio webcast will remain available on Intuit’s website for one week after the conference call.

About Intuit

Intuit is a global technology platform that helps our customers and communities overcome their most important financial challenges. Serving millions of customers worldwide with TurboTax, QuickBooks, Credit Karma and Mint, we believe that everyone should have the opportunity to prosper and work tirelessly to find new, innovative ways to deliver on this belief. Please visit us for the latest news and information about Intuit and its brands and find us on social.

About Non-GAAP Financial Measures

This press release and the accompanying tables include non-GAAP financial measures. For a description of these non-GAAP financial measures, including the reasons management uses each measure, and reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable financial measures prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, please see the section of the accompanying tables titled “About Non-GAAP Financial Measures” as well as the related Table B1, Table B2, and Table E. A copy of the press release issued by Intuit today can be found on the investor relations page of Intuit’s website.

Cautions About Forward-looking Statements

This press release contain forward-looking statements, including the size of the market for tax preparation software and the timing of when individuals will file their tax returns, forecasts and timing of expected growth and future financial results of Intuit and its reporting segments, including Credit Karma; Intuit’s prospects for the business in fiscal 2021 and beyond; expectations regarding timing and growth of revenue from current or future products and services; expectations regarding customer growth; expectations regarding Intuit’s corporate tax rate; expectations regarding changes to our products and their impact on Intuit’s business; expectations regarding the amount and timing of any future dividends or share repurchases; expectations regarding availability of our offerings; expectations regarding the impact of our strategic decisions on Intuit’s business; and all of the statements under the heading “Forward-looking Guidance.”

Because these forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, there are important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations expressed in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties may be amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has caused significant global economic instability and uncertainty. These factors include, without limitation, the following: our ability to compete successfully; our participation in the Free File Alliance; potential governmental encroachment in our tax businesses; our ability to adapt to technological change; our ability to predict consumer behavior; our reliance on third-party intellectual property; our ability to protect our intellectual property rights; any harm to our reputation; risks associated with acquisition and divestiture activity, including the acquisition and integration of Credit Karma; the issuance of equity or incurrence of debt to fund an acquisition; our cybersecurity incidents (including those affecting the third parties we rely on); customer concerns about privacy and cybersecurity incidents; fraudulent activities by third parties using our offerings; our failure to process transactions effectively; interruption or failure of our information technology; our ability to maintain critical third-party business relationships; our ability to attract and retain talent; any deficiency in the quality or accuracy of our products (including the advice given by experts on our platform); any delays in product launches; difficulties in processing or filing customer tax submissions; risks associated with international operations; changes to public policy, laws or regulations affecting our businesses; litigation in which we are involved; the seasonal nature of our tax business; changes in tax rates and tax reform legislation; global economic changes; exposure to credit, counterparty and other risks in providing capital to businesses; amortization of acquired intangible assets and impairment charges; our ability to repay or otherwise comply with the terms of our outstanding debt; our ability to repurchase shares or distribute dividends; volatility of our stock price; and our ability to successfully market our offerings. More details about these and other risks that may impact our business are included in our Form 10-K for fiscal 2020 and in our other SEC filings. You can locate these reports through our website at http://investors.intuit.com. Fiscal 2021 full-year and Q3 guidance speaks only as of the date it was publicly issued by Intuit. Other forward-looking statements represent the judgment of the management of Intuit as of the date of this presentation. We do not undertake any duty to update any forward-looking statement or other information in this presentation.

TABLE A
INTUIT INC.
GAAP CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In millions, except per share amounts)
(Unaudited)
Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
January 31,
2021
January 31,
2020
January 31,
2021
January 31,
2020
Net revenue:
Product $ 495 $ 545 $ 862 $ 898
Service and other 1,081 1,151 2,037 1,963
Total net revenue 1,576 1,696 2,899 2,861
Costs and expenses:
Cost of revenue:
Cost of product revenue 22 24 37 41
Cost of service and other revenue 331 310 565 577
Amortization of acquired technology 14 6 21 12
Selling and marketing 580 593 942 976
Research and development 368 333 693 667
General and administrative 250 159 419 305
Amortization of other acquired intangible assets 36 1 38 3
Total costs and expenses [A] 1,601 1,426 2,715 2,581
Operating income (loss) (25 ) 270 184 280
Interest expense (7 ) (3 ) (15 ) (5 )
Interest and other income, net 54 15 63 29
Income before income taxes 22 282 232 304
Income tax provision [B] 2 42 14 7
Net income $ 20 $ 240 $ 218 $ 297
Basic net income per share $ 0.07 $ 0.92 $ 0.82 $ 1.14
Shares used in basic per share calculations 270 261 266 261
Diluted net income per share $ 0.07 $ 0.91 $ 0.81 $ 1.13
Shares used in diluted per share calculations 273 264 269 264
Cash dividends declared per common share $ 0.59 $ 0.53 $ 1.18 $ 1.06
See accompanying Notes.
INTUIT INC.
NOTES TO TABLE A
[A] The following table summarizes the total share-based compensation expense that we recorded in operating income (loss) for the periods shown.
Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
(in millions) January 31,
2021
January 31,
2020
January 31,
2021
January 31,
2020
Cost of revenue $ 16 $ 14 $ 31 $ 29
Selling and marketing 44 29 76 59
Research and development 67 37 105 75
General and administrative 53 27 79 55
Total share-based compensation expense $ 180 $ 107 $ 291 $ 218
[B] We compute our provision for or benefit from income taxes by applying the estimated annual effective tax rate to income or loss from recurring operations and adding the effects of any discrete income tax items specific to the period.
For the three and six months ended January 31, 2021, we recognized excess tax benefits on share-based compensation of $12 million and $64 million, respectively, in our provision for income taxes. For the three and six months ended January 31, 2020, we recognized excess tax benefits on share-based compensation of $23 million and $52 million, respectively, in our provision for income taxes.
Our effective tax rates for the three and six months ended January 31, 2021 were approximately 8% and 6%, respectively. The acquisition of Credit Karma has resulted in an increase in the annual effective tax rate from 25% at October 31, 2020 to 26% at January 31, 2021 primarily due to non-deductible share-based compensation and transaction costs. Excluding the effect of the change in annual effective tax rate for the quarter and discrete tax items, primarily related to share-based compensation tax benefits mentioned above, our effective tax rate for the three and six months ended January 31, 2021 was approximately 26%. The difference from the federal statutory rate of 21% was primarily due to state income taxes, non-deductible share-based compensation and non-deductible transaction costs related to the Credit Karma acquisition, which were partially offset by the tax benefit we received from the federal research and experimentation credit.
Our effective tax rates for the three and six months ended January 31, 2020 were approximately 15% and 2%, respectively. Excluding discrete tax items primarily related to share-based compensation tax benefits mentioned above, our effective tax rate for both periods was 24%. The difference from the federal statutory rate of 21% was primarily due to state income taxes and non-deductible share-based compensation, which were partially offset by the tax benefit we received from the federal research and experimentation credit.
TABLE B1
INTUIT INC.
RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
TO MOST DIRECTLY COMPARABLE GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
(In millions, except per share amounts)
(Unaudited)
Fiscal 2021
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Year to Date
GAAP operating income (loss) $ 209 $ (25 ) $ $ $ 184
Amortization of acquired technology 7 14 21
Amortization of other acquired intangible assets 2 36 38
Professional fees and transaction costs for business combinations 5 30 35
Share-based compensation expense 111 180 291
Non-GAAP operating income (loss) $ 334 $ 235 $ $ $ 569
GAAP net income (loss) $ 198 $ 20 $ $ $ 218
Amortization of acquired technology 7 14 21
Amortization of other acquired intangible assets 2 36 38
Professional fees and transaction costs for business combinations 5 30 35
Share-based compensation expense 111 180 291
Net (gain) loss on debt securities and other investments (7 ) (8 ) (15 )
Gain from sale of note receivable [A] (30 ) (30 )
Income tax effects and adjustments [B] (66 ) (57 ) (123 )
Non-GAAP net income (loss) $ 250 $ 185 $ $ $ 435
GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share $ 0.75 $ 0.07 $ $ $ 0.81
Amortization of acquired technology 0.03 0.05 0.08
Amortization of other acquired intangible assets 0.14 0.14
Professional fees and transaction costs for business combinations 0.02 0.11 0.13
Share-based compensation expense 0.42 0.66 1.08
Net (gain) loss on debt securities and other investments (0.03 ) (0.03 ) (0.05 )
Gain from sale of note receivable [A] (0.11 ) (0.11 )
Income tax effects and adjustments [B] (0.25 ) (0.21 ) (0.46 )
Non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share $ 0.94 $ 0.68 $ $ $ 1.62
Shares used in GAAP diluted per share calculation 265 273 269
Shares used in non-GAAP diluted per share calculation 265 273 269
[A] During the three months ended January 31, 2021, we recorded a $30 million gain from the sale of a note receivable that was previously written off.
[B] As discussed in “About Non-GAAP Financial Measures – Income Tax Effects and Adjustments” following Table E, our long-term non-GAAP tax rate eliminates the effects of non-recurring and period-specific items. Income tax adjustments consist primarily of the tax impact of the non-GAAP pre-tax adjustments and the excess tax benefits on share-based compensation.
See “About Non-GAAP Financial Measures” immediately following Table E for information on these measures, the items excluded from the most directly comparable GAAP measures in arriving at non-GAAP financial measures, and the reasons management uses each measure and excludes the specified amounts in arriving at each non-GAAP financial measure.
TABLE B2
INTUIT INC.
RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
TO MOST DIRECTLY COMPARABLE GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
(In millions, except per share amounts)
(Unaudited)
Fiscal 2020
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Full Year
GAAP operating income (loss) $ 10 $ 270 $ 1,413 $ 483 $ 2,176
Amortization of acquired technology 6 6 5 5 22
Amortization of other acquired intangible assets 2 1 2 1 6
Professional fees and transaction costs for business combinations 16 13 29
Share-based compensation expense 111 107 103 114 435
Non-GAAP operating income (loss) $ 129 $ 384 $ 1,539 $ 616 $ 2,668
GAAP net income (loss) $ 57 $ 240 $ 1,084 $ 445 $ 1,826
Amortization of acquired technology 6 6 5 5 22
Amortization of other acquired intangible assets 2 1 2 1 6
Professional fees and transaction costs for business combinations 16 13 29
Share-based compensation expense 111 107 103 114 435
Net (gain) loss on debt securities and other investments 1 1 2 1 5
Income tax effects and adjustments [A] (68 ) (49 ) (29 ) (102 ) (248 )
Non-GAAP net income (loss) $ 109 $ 306 $ 1,183 $ 477 $ 2,075
GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share $ 0.22 $ 0.91 $ 4.11 $ 1.68 $ 6.92
Amortization of acquired technology 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.08
Amortization of other acquired intangible assets 0.01 0.01 0.02
Professional fees and transaction costs for business combinations 0.06 0.05 0.11
Share-based compensation expense 0.42 0.41 0.39 0.44 1.65
Net (gain) loss on debt securities and other investments 0.01 0.02
Income tax effects and adjustments [A] (0.26 ) (0.18 ) (0.11 ) (0.38 ) (0.94 )
Non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share $ 0.41 $ 1.16 $ 4.49 $ 1.81 $ 7.86
Shares used in GAAP diluted per share calculation 264 264 264 264 264
Shares used in non-GAAP diluted per share calculation 264 264 264 264 264
[A] As discussed in “About Non-GAAP Financial Measures – Income Tax Effects and Adjustments” following Table E, our long-term non-GAAP tax rate eliminates the effects of non-recurring and period-specific items. Income tax adjustments consist primarily of the tax impact of the non-GAAP pre-tax adjustments and the excess tax benefits on share-based compensation.
See “About Non-GAAP Financial Measures” immediately following Table E for information on these measures, the items excluded from the most directly comparable GAAP measures in arriving at non-GAAP financial measures, and the reasons management uses each measure and excludes the specified amounts in arriving at each non-GAAP financial measure.
TABLE C
INTUIT INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In millions)
(Unaudited)
January 31,
2021
July 31,
2020
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents $ 1,952 $ 6,442
Investments 786 608
Accounts receivable, net 465 149
Income taxes receivable 153 12
Prepaid expenses and other current assets 312 314
Current assets before funds held for customers 3,668 7,525
Funds held for customers 426 455
Total current assets 4,094 7,980
Long-term investments 41 19
Property and equipment, net 792 734
Operating lease right-of-use assets 392 226
Goodwill 5,598 1,654
Acquired intangible assets, net 3,384 28
Long-term deferred income taxes 6 65
Other assets 291 225
Total assets $ 14,598 $ 10,931
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Short-term debt $ 325 $ 1,338
Accounts payable 486 305
Accrued compensation and related liabilities 326 482
Deferred revenue 752 652
Other current liabilities 362 297
Current liabilities before customer fund deposits 2,251 3,074
Customer fund deposits 426 455
Total current liabilities 2,677 3,529
Long-term debt 2,033 2,031
Long-term deferred income tax liabilities 580 2
Operating lease liabilities 391 221
Other long-term obligations 49 42
Total liabilities 5,730 5,825
Stockholders’ equity 8,868 5,106
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 14,598 $ 10,931
TABLE D
INTUIT INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In millions)
(Unaudited)
Six Months Ended
January 31, January 31,
2021 2020
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income $ 218 $ 297
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation 77 98
Amortization of acquired intangible assets 60 16
Non-cash operating lease cost 28 32
Share-based compensation expense 291 218
Deferred income taxes 11 (30 )
Other (48 ) 4
Total adjustments 419 338
Originations of loans held for sale (41 )
Sale and principal payments of loans held for sale 143
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable (178 ) (516 )
Income taxes receivable (82 ) 13
Prepaid expenses and other assets (63 ) (82 )
Accounts payable 87 175
Accrued compensation and related liabilities (269 ) (121 )
Deferred revenue 90 51
Operating lease liabilities (27 ) (28 )
Other liabilities 27 63
Total changes in operating assets and liabilities (415 ) (445 )
Net cash provided by operating activities 324 190
Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchases of corporate and customer fund investments (535 ) (357 )
Sales of corporate and customer fund investments 89 73
Maturities of corporate and customer fund investments 265 287
Purchases of property and equipment (71 ) (68 )
Acquisitions of businesses, net of cash acquired (3,045 )
Originations of term loans to small businesses (70 ) (166 )
Principal repayments of term loans from small businesses 53 155
Other 48 (20 )
Net cash used in investing activities (3,266 ) (96 )
Cash flows from financing activities:
Repayments on borrowings under unsecured revolving credit facility (1,000 )
Repayment of debt (13 ) (25 )
Proceeds from issuance of stock under employee stock plans 108 121
Payments for employee taxes withheld upon vesting of restricted stock units (168 ) (104 )
Cash paid for purchases of treasury stock (164 ) (278 )
Dividends and dividend rights paid (321 ) (280 )
Net change in customer fund deposits (29 ) 25
Other (1 )
Net cash used in financing activities (1,587 ) (542 )
Effect of exchange rates on cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents 10 (2 )
Net decrease in cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents (4,519 ) (450 )
Cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents at beginning of period 6,697 2,352
Cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents at end of period $ 2,178 $ 1,902
Reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents reported within the condensed consolidated balance sheets to the total amounts reported on the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows
Cash and cash equivalents $ 1,952 $ 1,641
Restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents included in funds held for customers [A] 226 261
Total cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents at end of period $ 2,178 $ 1,902
Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing activities:
Issuance of common stock in a business combination $ 3,798 $
[A] See quarterly reports filed on Form 10-Q for reconciliation of funds held for customers by investment category.
TABLE E
INTUIT INC.
RECONCILIATION OF FORWARD-LOOKING GUIDANCE FOR NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES TO PROJECTED GAAP REVENUE, OPERATING INCOME, AND EPS
(In millions, except per share amounts)
(Unaudited)
Forward-Looking Guidance
GAAP
Range of Estimate
Non-GAAP
Range of Estimate
From To Adjmts From To
Three Months Ending April 30, 2021
Revenue $ 4,605 $ 4,655 $ $ 4,605 $ 4,655
Operating income $ 2,180 $ 2,220 $ 295 [a] $ 2,475 $ 2,515
Diluted earnings per share $ 5.85 $ 5.95 $ 0.90 [b] $ 6.75 $ 6.85
Twelve Months Ending July 31, 2021
Revenue $ 8,810 $ 8,995 $ $ 8,810 $ 8,995
Operating income $ 1,920 $ 1,990 $ 1,055 [c] $ 2,975 $ 3,045
Diluted earnings per share $ 5.30 $ 5.50 $ 2.90 [d] $ 8.20 $ 8.40
See “About Non-GAAP Financial Measures” immediately following Table E for information on these measures, the items excluded from the most directly comparable GAAP measures in arriving at non-GAAP financial measures, and the reasons management uses each measure and excludes the specified amounts in arriving at each non-GAAP financial measure.
[a] Reflects estimated adjustments for share-based compensation expense of approximately $224 million; amortization of acquired technology of approximately $15 million; and amortization of other acquired intangible assets of approximately $56 million.
[b] Reflects estimated adjustments in item [a], income taxes related to these adjustments, and other income tax effects related to the use of the non-GAAP tax rate.
[c] Reflects estimated adjustments for share-based compensation expense of approximately $813 million; professional fees and transaction costs primarily related to the acquisition of Credit Karma of approximately $39 million; amortization of acquired technology of approximately $51 million; and amortization of other acquired intangibles of approximately $152 million.
[d] Reflects estimated adjustments in item [c], income taxes related to these adjustments, a $30 million gain from the sale of a note receivable that was previously written off, and other income tax effects related to the use of the non-GAAP tax rate.

INTUIT INC.
ABOUT NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES

The accompanying press release dated February 23, 2021 contains non-GAAP financial measures. Table B1, Table B2, and Table E reconcile the non-GAAP financial measures in that press release to the most directly comparable financial measures prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). These non-GAAP financial measures include non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss) and non-GAAP net income (loss) per share.

Non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered as a substitute for, or superior to, measures of financial performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. These non-GAAP financial measures do not reflect a comprehensive system of accounting, differ from GAAP measures with the same names, and may differ from non-GAAP financial measures with the same or similar names that are used by other companies.

We compute non-GAAP financial measures using the same consistent method from quarter to quarter and year to year. We may consider whether other significant items that arise in the future should be excluded from our non-GAAP financial measures.

We exclude the following items from all of our non-GAAP financial measures:

  • Share-based compensation expense
  • Amortization of acquired technology
  • Amortization of other acquired intangible assets
  • Goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges
  • Gains and losses on disposals of businesses and long-lived assets
  • Professional fees and transaction costs for business combinations

We also exclude the following items from non-GAAP net income (loss) and diluted net income (loss) per share:

We believe these non-GAAP financial measures provide meaningful supplemental information regarding Intuit’s operating results primarily because they exclude amounts that we do not consider part of ongoing operating results when planning and forecasting and when assessing the performance of the organization, our individual operating segments, or our senior management. Segment managers are not held accountable for share-based compensation expense, amortization, or the other excluded items and, accordingly, we exclude these amounts from our measures of segment performance. We believe our non-GAAP financial measures also facilitate the comparison by management and investors of results for current periods and guidance for future periods with results for past periods.

The following are descriptions of the items we exclude from our non-GAAP financial measures.

Share-based compensation expenses. These consist of non-cash expenses for stock options, restricted stock units, and our Employee Stock Purchase Plan. When considering the impact of equity awards, we place greater emphasis on overall shareholder dilution rather than the accounting charges associated with those awards.

Amortization of acquired technology and amortization of other acquired intangible assets. When we acquire a business in a business combination, we are required by GAAP to record the fair values of the intangible assets of the business and amortize them over their useful lives. Amortization of acquired technology in cost of revenue includes amortization of software and other technology assets of acquired businesses. Amortization of other acquired intangible assets in operating expenses includes amortization of assets such as customer lists, covenants not to compete, and trade names.

Goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges. We exclude from our non-GAAP financial measures non-cash charges to adjust the carrying values of goodwill and other acquired intangible assets to their estimated fair values.

Gains and losses on disposals of businesses and long-lived assets. We exclude from our non-GAAP financial measures gains and losses on disposals of businesses and long-lived assets because they are unrelated to our ongoing business operating results.

Professional fees and transaction costs for business combinations. We exclude from our non-GAAP financial measures the professional fees we incur to complete business combinations. These include investment banking, legal, and accounting fees.

Gains and losses on debt and equity securities and other investments. We exclude from our non-GAAP financial measures gains and losses that we record when we impair available-for-sale debt and equity securities and other investments.

Income tax effects and adjustments. We use a long-term non-GAAP tax rate for evaluating operating results and for planning, forecasting, and analyzing future periods. This long-term non-GAAP tax rate excludes the income tax effects of the non-GAAP pre-tax adjustments described above, and eliminates the effects of non-recurring and period specific items which can vary in size and frequency. Based on our current long-term projections, we are using a long-term non-GAAP tax rate of 23% for fiscal 2020 and 24% for fiscal 2021. This long-term non-GAAP tax rate could be subject to change for various reasons including significant changes in our geographic earnings mix or fundamental tax law changes in major jurisdictions in which we operate. We will evaluate this long-term non-GAAP tax rate on an annual basis and whenever any significant events occur which may materially affect this rate.

Operating results and gains and losses on the sale of discontinued operations. From time to time, we sell or otherwise dispose of selected operations as we adjust our portfolio of businesses to meet our strategic goals. In accordance with GAAP, we segregate the operating results of discontinued operations as well as gains and losses on the sale of these discontinued operations from continuing operations on our GAAP statements of operations but continue to include them in GAAP net income or loss and net income or loss per share. We exclude these amounts from our non-GAAP financial measures.

View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210223006005/en/

Contacts

Investors
Kim Watkins
Intuit Inc.
650-944-3324
kim_watkins@intuit.com

Media
Kali Fry
Intuit Inc.
650-944-3036
kali_fry@intuit.com

Business

Democratic Mayoral Candidates Talk Making the City More Business-Friendly

becker blake

Published

on

warby parker business nyc

warby parker business nyc

A Warby Parker event (photo: Demetrius Freeman/Mayor’s Office)


This past week, advocacy group Tech:NYC and glasses company Warby Parker, among others, co-hosted a forum with seven leading Democratic candidates for mayor, who appeared one at a time to answer questions from Business Insider columnist Josh Barro about the city’s future and their agendas.

The participating candidates, in order of appearance, were entrepreneur Andrew Yang, former sanitation commissioner Kathryn Garcia, Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, former federal housing secretary Shaun Donovan, former Wall Street executive Ray McGuire, Comptroller Scott Stringer, and Maya Wiley, a civil rights attorney and former counsel to Mayor de Blasio. The event was co-hosted by AT&T, Bowery Farming, Etsy, Harry’s, Via, WeWork, and Zola, among others.

The questions, somewhat uniform to each candidate, focused on issues relevant to the tech and business communities, such as how to attract business to New York City in the post-COVID-19 economy, the failed Amazon ‘HQ2’ deal, housing development, and expanding broadband access.

Andrew Yang
Barro asked Yang as a businessman how he thought that businesses choose to locate in New York, and how as mayor Yang would make them more interested in the city. Citing his experience in start-ups, Yang argued that the location of companies depends on where their employees would like to be. He said that “if there’s one thing that makes the world goes around for founders, it’s talent.”

To make the city more attractive to employees, Yang honed in rectifying quality-of-life issues such as “getting schools open to garbage pick up to public safety concerns.” He reiterated his oft-cited stance that the city must restore its “value proposition” to business owners and others alike to make some of the challenges of the city, like cost and commutes, worth it.

Barro asked why “garbage is piled high on the sidewalks” and why the city has not moved to containerized pick-up. Yang called out the cuts to the Department of Sanitation budget, saying that “if you’ve noticed more trash on the street, that’s why,” and saying that is something he would restore funding to.

Barro moved on to ‘HQ2,’ which was slated for Queens before activists and elected officials who opposed the Amazon deal pushed the company to back out, and the role of subsidies in attracting major technology companies to New York City. Saying that “Manhattan has a natural draw,” Yang acknowledged the role of subsidies in attracting companies to the other boroughs.

Yang said that he supported ‘HQ2’ for Queens, and falsely said, “I’m one of the only mayoral candidates who’s said on the record that losing Amazon was a mistake for the city.” Barro pressed Yang on whether the “billions in subsidies” that Amazon would have received would have been worth it. Yang said it wasn’t great policy. “You can’t just let them walk away,” Yang said, citing the many thousands of jobs the campus was slated to create and support of the service industry it would have provided.

Barro then asked if changes to corporate structures that allow for remote work, accelerated by the demands of the COVID-19 pandemic, affected the city’s ability to attract tech companies. “New York City is fundamentally a place-based economy,” Yang said, and “the New York City advantage will still be there.” Barro pressed Yang further on the difference of attracting workers versus attracting firms, asking Yang how his strategy to attract companies would change. Yang admitted that the city will have to “compete and make its case” in a way it did not have to in the past, adding that he is exploring “incentives” for workers to commute to the city five times a week, mentioning gift cards to New York City bars and restaurants as a possibility, and making investments to increase tourism.

Barro asked Yang about reducing the sky-high costs of the city’s capital projects. Yang said he would have the city “be more disciplined” about having contractors focus on the quality of their work rather than sub-contracting. He also mentioned he would streamline bureaucracy, saying that it was not user-friendly for small businesses.

Asked how many housing units the city should build over the next ten years, Yang did not present a specific figure, saying only that it would be in “the tens of thousands” for his first term and that he would want to increase the rate of housing development in the city. Seemingly underprepared to discuss housing development goals, Yang pivoted to his pledge to reduce street homelessness “by 50%” over his first term, and said he would want to convert some vacant hotels into affordable and supportive housing.

Barro concluded by asking Yang if he had connected with any of the other mayoral candidates, to which Yang responded that he was “a huge Kathryn Garcia fan” and that she was someone he “admired a great deal.”

Kathryn Garcia
Asked why she is the best candidate for mayor, Garcia told Barro that “understanding how the city works is absolutely critical, because then you can actually fix things” and “know where the pain points are.” She said her managerial experience in various roles in city government made her the strongest potential next leader for New York City.

Barro asked Garcia about the city’s garbage situation, asking if it was possible to “get it off the sidewalks and into closed containers,” to which Garcia said it was fully possible, and that part of that effort would require the city “rethink the public realm” about how street space is used. She mentioned that as sanitation commissioner she had launched a pilot program for commercial corridors that is being implemented.

Asked how she thought public spaces were being underutilized, Garcia advocated that “you need people walking the streets of New York, spending money” and that public space management efforts should look at “Open Restaurants, Open Culture, but also thinking about greening the city,” with references to two recent pandemic-era public space programs launched by the city.

On attracting companies to the city, Garcia said she would focus on a “liveable city,” as companies “locate where they have really strong labor forces.”

“We have to do way better” building housing, Garcia said, adding that her efforts would target “unlocking the private sector by getting rid of the bureaucracy” and building between 20,000 and 30,000 units a year. Citing that “time is money in construction” and that “we don’t actually do good planning,” Garcia said she would increase community input and reduce bureaucracy. Barro challenged her on this point, asking how she would resolve situations where increased considerations would conflict with expeditiousness, citing her support while working under de Blasio for special construction permits for hotels. Garcia sidestepped the first part of the question, only defending her support of special permits for hotels.

On expanding broadband access, Garcia said she would target lowering costs, facilitating rule changes to make the expansion of broadband easier in communities, and having the city connect residents to broadband themselves if companies did not create broadband access where the city would like.

Eric Adams
Adams said that he is the best candidate for mayor because of his life experiences from growing up in poverty, experiencing police brutality, becoming a police officer himself, and his diabetes diagnosis that he went on to beat through a healthy lifestyle. As “someone who has gone through a lot,” Adams said he was in the best position to help other people “going through a lot.”

On how companies should be “respectful” in the city and be good neighbors, something Barro brought up as Adams has discussed it in the past, Adams said he would challenge corporations to think on the question “how do I involve myself in the communities put in place long before me?” such as working with the Department of Education to teach children life skills. On how he would actually accomplish these partnerships, Adams pointed towards working with specific organizations and not “demonizing companies” and creating “this synergy that we are in this together.”

Examining his stated plan to name an “efficiency czar” to make city government work better, Barro asked how Adams’ approach to reducing waste differed from past tactics under Bloomberg and de Blasio. Adams argued that “the city is dysfunctional” because “agencies are not aligned” and pointed to his record in the NYPD using data and technology as part of the department’s modern evolution. When pressed by Barro on how agencies would operate differently, Adams cited his mother saying “What gets measured, gets done. If you don’t inspect what you expect, it’s all suspect,” and said he would want real-time data for examining basic city services.

Barro gave Adams the same question he gave to Yang on whether the city should push for tech companies to locate in boroughs other than Manhattan and whether Adams would support subsidies to make that happen. Adams denied that the city needed a subsidy program, and turned to discussing quality-of-life issues. To “build the proper environment” for companies to locate all over the city, he would focus on providing services such as access to transportation, public safety, and high-speed internet, he said.

Barro brought up the defeated Industry City rezoning in Brooklyn, an expansion and development proposal promising thousands of jobs and more economic activity along the Brooklyn waterfront that was ultimately defeated by local activists and City Council Member Carlos Menchaca. “It’s really unfortunate that we could not seal the deal in Industry City,” Adams said, adding that on development projects in general he would want to focus on being inclusive but also on “how can we get to a yes.” On whether or not local Council members have too much power to kill projects in their districts, Adams argued that for projects that affect the entire city, one member of the City Council should not have the power to shut them down, an informal practice known as “member deference” where the full Council defers to the local member whose district the proposal is slated for.

On housing, Adams told Barro that asking how many units of housing to add was “the wrong question” and that the city should audit its current housing to see where there are vacancies or lack of use and go from there. Barro pushed back, saying that even with auditing vacant housing more housing must be developed because of the city’s growing population, on which Adams deflected and instead pressed his desire to identify unused housing.

Shaun Donovan
Barro opened his conversation with Donovan, the former head of housing in the city and nationally under Mayor Bloomberg and President Obama, on housing. Donovan said the city should add 50,000 units per year, a very large goal, and touted his “15-minute neighborhoods” plan to ensure every New Yorkers lives in a great neighborhood with access to everything they need.

On rezonings, Donovan said he was open to upzonings for more housing, such as what the de Blasio administration is currently attempting in SoHo. He added that there should be a “citywide land use budget” to “make sure every community is doing its fair share,” through looking at ways to add density and using citywide inclusionary zoning.

After Barro asked what he would do differently to add housing from his time under Bloomberg, Donovan said the scope of the city’s housing problem is wide enough that “changing the trajectory” for the city takes years. He also said he was proud of the Bloomberg legacy on upzoning wealthier communities.

On lowering the cost of construction, Donovan discussed “building differently” such as using new technologies and having an administration “that brings innovation to every phase of what government does.”

On attracting increasingly mobile workers and firms to New York City, Donovan called himself “an urban optimist” and that the question was about whether or not specifically New York City could manage the challenge. New York City can become the “tech center” of the world, he said, and he would make it happen through his specific plans and by focusing on quality-of-life issues.

Ray McGuire
McGuire argued that he was the best candidate for mayor because of his private sector experience, where he was one of the top executives at Citi and on Wall Street more generally, saying that “this is not the time where someone gets to the mayoral spot to learn how to manage or lead.”

On attracting businesses, McGuire said that the city should “incentivize businesses to do more business here, not less” and that he would work on uniting business interests with the rest of the city, rather than pursuing divisive measures such as increasing taxes.

To move “job centers out to the outer boroughs,” McGuire supported using subsidies, which he referred to as incentives. McGuire said the collapse of the Amazon ‘HQ2’ deal was a mistake and that the project would have been a big net positive for the city, even with the subsidies.

On expanding broadband access, McGuire said it’s essential for education, and pointed to his economic comeback plan, which would include efforts to create universal broadband access.

To improve the efficiency of the city’s capital projects and “to bring costs under control,” McGuire said he would “bring all constituents to the table.” He said that he “wasn’t in anyone’s pocket” and that his “sole focus” is on what is best for the city, that he’s not “focused on sub-agendas.” He referenced de Blasio’s tagline of the “Tale of Two Cities,” saying that now New York City was a “fractured city.”

Calling his answer “nonspecific,” Barro pushed McGuire to elaborate on what made his leadership skills unique. McGuire said that, having led a global business, he was the only candidate with the skills to unite the diverse constituencies of New York City and focus on “shared prosperity.”

On housing, McGuire said he would like to increase the city’s housing units by 10%, or 350,000 units. Barro asked McGuire for a timeline on such development, which McGuire side-stepped, pointing to lowering construction costs and the economic benefits new construction would bring.

Scott Stringer
Stringer said he should be the next mayor in part because he is a “real seasoned government leader, who has vision and experience.”

Barro asked Stringer how he would seek to regain jobs lost in the COVID-19 pandemic, confronted with “an economy that may be permanently different in certain ways,” citing business travel as something that may permanently decrease.

Stringer replied that he would focus on small businesses, including by directing $1 billion from the city’s federal stimulus money to them. He would provide tax incentives for new businesses to locate in the city in “vacant corridors” and would make sure small businesses are not “fined and fee-ed into oblivion.” He said small business owners would not need to hire an expediter to get projects approved in the city and he would create a tech platform for small businesses to use to efficiently navigate city processes.

Asked what he would do differently from Bloomberg and de Blasio on the issues of inefficiency in small business processes, Stringer lambasted de Blasio by saying “what he didn’t do was govern.” Saying “you gotta manage this town,” Stringer said that he would focus on actually accomplishing goals that the city sets for itself.

On attracting tech companies to boroughs other than Manhattan and the role of subsidies in those conversations, Stringer said “it’s exciting that we’re spreading our economy out,” that “if we build it, they will come,” that he would focus on quality-of-life issues such as transportation, and that attracting businesses relies on the “value proposition” of what the city can offer businesses.

On how many housing units he would seek to create as mayor, Stringer said “as many as possible,” but he said key to his vision is creating enough “low-income housing” to actually meet the need in the city. Looking at the legacies of Bloomberg and de Blasio, he said, “We’ve had mayors talking about these big numbers, but they have not helped people get housing.” His efforts would focus on housing that targets those close to homelessness and would focus on true affordability. He would create 10,000 units of low-income housing and “catalogue” the vacant parcels the city owns for potential developments.

Maya Wiley
Saying that the COVID-19 pandemic “pulled the curtain back” on the issues the city faced, Wiley said that the challenge for the next mayor would be to “create a more unified city.” Doing this requires “very different leadership” to pursue “transformative policy,” Wiley said, adding, “I’m not a politician, and I think that’s the point.”

On expanding broadband, Wiley pointed to her work on universal broadband when working for de Blasio at City Hall by soliciting input from outside groups such as Girls Who Code, and by unifying the efforts of different agencies to work on the project. When Barro pushed Wiley for concrete steps for accomplishing universal broadband, she said she would focus government efforts on the “last mile problem in highly, highly, underserved areas” by “asset-mapping” current city resources that could be used to provide universal broadband. She would also pursue public-private partnerships, and look at technological innovations, she said.

On small businesses, Barro asked about why Wiley’s platform would have the city increase the number of restaurant health inspections, but to have those inspections announced in advance. Wiley said sometimes the city’s efforts to protect health can backfire by “jeopardizing the business rather than serving the public,” and that her plan would maintain restaurants’ compliance with health code violations while

Adding to her response, Wiley said she would streamline small businesses’ interactions with the city and grow their relationship with the city. She would want the city to be more proactive in their assistance to small businesses, so that they work together to solve problems rather than having the city shutting down actions after the fact. As an example, she mentioned having the city release blueprints for COVID-19-safe outdoor dining vestibules, rather than punishing restaurants for non-compliant vestibules after those businesses spent thousands of dollars “that they don’t have” on them. This would be “business-friendly, without sacrificing the issues we have to protect for the public,” she said.

Barro asked Wiley if there were other “big pilots” such as Open Streets she would want to pursue as mayor. “City government is a city unto itself,” she replied, and said that it is important to “recognize where government needs to partner with itself” better. To that end, she mentioned her plan to create an Office of Public Space Management, which would unite different agencies to create a centralized approach.

Continue Reading

Business

Here’s a list of pandemic assistance programs for small businesses

becker blake

Published

on

Allie Salas, owner of Reno Aspire Fitness, stands in her gym on Feb. 18, 2021.  Women and minority business owners continue to struggle amid the pandemic.
Allie Salas, owner of Reno Aspire Fitness, stands in her gym on Feb. 18, 2021. Women and minority business owners continue to struggle amid the pandemic.

This story is free because it is part of the Reno Gazette Journal’s essential coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic. This kind of journalism takes time and resources. Please consider subscribing.

Despite the improved numbers for new cases and deaths compared to the peak of the pandemic, COVID-19 continues to have an outsized impact on small businesses.

The passage and signing of the American Rescue Plan Act in March kicked off another round of funding for COVID relief, which includes several assistance programs for small businesses. While this is good news for struggling business owners, many either don’t apply or underestimate the amounts that they qualify for, said Kayla Banda, a business development advisor with the Nevada Small Business Development Center.

Some business owners and independent contractors don’t even know that relief options exist, especially smaller assistance programs run by local and state entities.

“The big thing is that a lot of businesses don’t know that they can qualify for assistance,” Banda said.

“I’ve talked to clients who had no idea that they could actually qualify as a new business, for example. I’ve also had clients who left money on the table when they could’ve gotten more.”

This makes it especially important for small business owners to not just keep tabs on the various assistance programs but also educate themselves about the benefits they qualify for. Business owners should also move quickly as funding will eventually run out, particularly given the high demand for these programs.

For subscribers:Shell company transparency law takes aim at a key Nevada industry. Will it have an impact?

Here’s a list of several pandemic assistance programs for businesses, including those that provide financial assistance and forgivable loans for entrepreneurs impacted by COVID-19:

  • Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)
  • Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL)
  • Shuttered Venue Operators Grant (SVOG)
  • Restaurant Revitalization Fund (RRF)
  • SBA Debt Relief
  • Coronavirus Food Assistance Program 2
  • COBRA Premium Assistance
  • Pandemic assistance from state and local governments

Here is a quick rundown of the various pandemic assistance programs available for businesses.

An image showing several small mom and pop shops lining Victorian Plaza in downtown Sparks on Friday, Oct. 24. A group of local business owners, known as 39 North Downtown, hope to revitalize Sparks and attract new businesses to the area.

Paycheck Protection Program

The PPP, which is overseen by the Small Business Administration, is arguably the most widely known pandemic relief program for businesses. It’s designed to incentivize small businesses to keep workers on the job by providing funding for payroll.

The biggest draw of this program is that while it is technically a loan, borrowers can have the amount written off if they apply for forgiveness within 10 months of the last covered period of their agreement. It’s basically free assistance for those who qualify for it.

Also, while the PPP is designed as a payroll assistance program, it can also apply to small businesses that do not have any employees.

“Some people like sole proprietors and independent contractors think that, ‘Oh, I don’t have payroll because I don’t have any employees so I can’t qualify,’ which is totally not true,” Banda said. “If you receive a Schedule C (profit or loss form from the IRS) … you can actually use that to calculate your loan amount.”

For more details about the program, including help for finding a qualified lender, visit the SBA’s official PPP website. Otherwise, call your local SBA District office for more details. In Northern Nevada, the number is 775-885-7647.

Economic Injury Disaster Loan

Also known as EIDL, this is another program overseen by the SBA and provides economic relief for small businesses as well as nonprofits that have suffered from a temporary loss of revenue. The assistance can be used to pay for financial obligations or operating expenses that a business would have been able to cover on its own had the pandemic not occurred.

Like the PPP, this program has been around for a while but has one key difference.

“It’s not forgivable,” Banda said. “But it’s still a pretty good option for businesses.”

Borrowers can also apply for both the PPP and EIDL, but funds from both are not allowed to be used for the same purpose. Applicants also must be physically located in the United States and have fewer than 500 employees.

The maximum loan amount is $150,000, with loans above $25,000 requiring collateral. The interest rate is 3.75% for businesses and 2.75% for nonprofits, with payment terms up to 30 years.

For more information or to apply for a loan, visit the SBA’s official EIDL website.

Shuttered Venue Operators Grant

Known as SVOG for short, this program was amended by the American Rescue Plan Act and provides more than $16 billion in grants to venues that have been closed due to COVID-19. Of that number $2 billion is set aside for smaller operations with 50 employees or less.

Applicants that qualify for the program will receive grants equal to 45% of their gross revenue. The maximum grant amount for one applicant is $10 million.

Entities that are eligible for the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant include:

  • Live venue operators or promoters
  • Theatrical producers
  • Live performing arts organization operators
  • Relevant museum operators, zoos and aquariums who meet specific criteria
  • Motion picture theater operators
  • Talent representatives

Note that booking agencies can qualify even if they don’t operate a venue per se.

“They can qualify if 70% or more of their annual revenue comes from booking the talent for the venues,” Banda said.

Keep in mind, however, that while it’s possible to receive assistance via the SVOG grant after getting PPP assistance, the reverse is not true, Banda warned.

“If you apply for the SVOG, you can no longer apply for the PPP so people need to get their PPP first before applying for the SVOG,” Banda said.

For more information or to apply, visit the SBA’s official SVOG site.

Restaurant Revitalization Fund

Server Delaney Fine, left, brings some drinks to customers at the Squeeze In restaurant in Reno on May 13, 2020.

This $26.5 billion fund was established by the American Rescue Plan Act for food and drink establishments. The program, which will be awarded by the SBA, will set aside $5 billion of its funds for smaller businesses with gross revenues of less than $500,000. There will be a cap of $10 million for each business, including $5 million for each physical location of a business operation.

According to the American Rescue Plan Act, businesses that can apply for the Restaurant Revitalization Fund include:

  • Restaurants
  • Food trucks
  • Food stands
  • Food carts
  • Caterers
  • Inns
  • Saloons
  • Tavern
  • Bars
  • Lounges
  • Brewpubs
  • Taprooms
  • Tasting rooms

Publicly-traded companies are ineligible, which is good news for smaller operations that were squeezed out by large chains during the first round of PPP funding.

Funds will be allocated within phases, with businesses that lost a larger percentage of revenue being prioritized first. The RRF will also give higher priority to small businesses run by women, veterans and socially and economically disadvantaged proprietors.

“That’s good because my initial concern was that big restaurants will go in and just eat up those funds,” Banda said. “Eligibility for the program is so open and broad.”

According to the National Restaurant Association, eligible businesses “may receive a tax-free federal grant equal to the amount of its pandemic-related revenue loss, calculated by subtracting its 2020 gross receipts from its 2019 gross receipts.”

If you already received PPP funding, that amount will be deducted from your eligibility for the RRF.

As of early April, an official date has not been announced for program applications but it should be included in the SBA’s main COVID relief operations site once it is available.

SBA Debt Relief

The SBA Debt Relief Program provides financial assistance for borrowers of three types of SBA loans:

As part of the program, the SBA will pay six months of principal, interest, and any associated fees owed by borrowers for such loans that are in “regular servicing status.” The assistance will be automatically provided without needing an application and will apply to loans that were approved up to September 27, 2020.

Coronavirus Food Assistance Program 2

CAPTION TK

This program is administered by the USDA and was re-launched on April 5 after signups ended on Dec. 11. The program provides financial assistance to farmers, ranchers and other producers to absorb increased costs from market disruptions caused by the pandemic. Assistance is based on the type of commodities grown or raised by farmers and ranchers.

Commodities that are eligible for Coronavirus Food Assistance Program 2 assistance include:

  • Specialty crops
  • Livestock
  • Dairy
  • Row crops
  • Aquaculture
  • Floriculture
  • Nursery crops

The launch of CFAP 2 coincides with an increase in payment rates for commodities such as cattle under the original CFAP program.

“We did what we call additional top-up payments to folks who were already signed up and each commodity had a payment rate,” said Gus Wegren, acting state executive director for the USDA Farm Service Agency in Nevada. The first CFAP round accounted for nearly $26.7 million in payments for Nevada producers alone and more than $1.2 billion in California.

The USDA also expects to make $4.5 billion in payments to 560,000 producers as part of new CFAP 2 funding that pays $20 in assistance per acre. Total funds for the second round of CFAP 2 funding amounts to about $6 billion, Wegren said. There is a payment limit of $250,000 for each applicant but exceptions also exist for legal entities that have multiple members that provide active labor or personnel management. Examples include cattle operations that are set up as limited liability companies.

“If they can prove that each member provided at least 400 hours of active personal labor or management, then they can get $500,000 for two members or $750,000 for three members,” Wegren said.

Applications with a focus on CFAP 2 will also be expedited by the USDA for financial assistance under its cooperative programs. Award amounts for the cooperative agreements will range from $20,000 to $99,999 over a time period between six months and one year. Applicants will be notified of their acceptance or denial by June 20 and awards will be in place by Sept. 1.

Sign-ups for CFAP 2 will be open for at least 60 days from April 5. The USDA is also looking into launching a new program such as a potential CFAP 3 to provide targeted assistance for certain types of producers like organic farmers, for example, Wegren said.

For more information or to apply for CFAP 2, vist the USDA’s CFAP 2 website.

The USDA also offers various loan assistance programs for farmers and ranchers. More details on these programs are available at the USDA’s webpage for funding opportunities.

COBRA Premium Assistance

This program provides insurance assistance to employees who lost their coverage and the subsidy will come in the form of a payroll tax credit for employers. As part of the American Rescue Plan Act, the Department of Labor announced on April 7 that the federal government will provide eligible employees who lost their healthcare coverage a 100% subsidy on their COBRA insurance premiums between April 1 and Sept. 30.

For more details, visit the Department of Labor’s COBRA Premium Subsidy web page.

Pandemic assistance from state and local governments

Several state and local governments provided pandemic assistance during the initial round of federal funding and the passage of the American Rescue Plan Act is no different. In Northern Nevada, local governments such as Reno, Sparks and Washoe County were in the middle of assessing new assistance plans as of early April.

Here is the status of the various state and local pandemic assistance programs currently in Reno-Sparks. This article will be updated as new information is released.

Nevada Governor’s Office of Economic Development: The state economic development agency oversaw Nevada’s Pandemic Emergency Technical Support program, which paid out more than $50 million to applicants during its first round of funding. Nevada received about 13,500 applications for the program, which includes small businesses, non-profits, arts and culture organizations, and local Chambers of Commerce. Funds from the program can be used to cover capital such as rent, inventory, payroll and utilities, as well as protective equipment and retrofits for improving safety.

While applications have since closed, Gov. Steve Sisolak has requested an additional $50 million in funding from the Nevada Legislature. If approved, the state says it will continue to fund small businesses that submitted applications to the program, including those that were denied due to the lack of available funding.

For more details, visit GOED’s main PETS webpage.

City of Reno: The city of Reno is currently looking at its options to provide pandemic assistance from the funding provided by the American Rescue Plan Act.

“We do not yet have guidance on how these funds can be spent, so we do not have any programs yet for spending the ARPA,” said Matt Brown, a spokesman for the city of Reno.

“We are still gathering information. Also, we don’t have the funds yet and are not quite sure of when they will arrive, as of right now.  This is changing daily and, hopefully, we will get the guidance soon so we can prepare a plan for Council approval.”

City of Sparks: The city of Sparks is also assessing its options for providing pandemic assistance to small businesses from the latest round of federal funding.

“Right now we are still unsure as to how much money we will be receiving through the American Rescue Plan,” said spokeswoman Julie Duewel.

“It is looking like we should receive the first distribution right around May 10. We do know that we will be putting a substantial amount of these funds back into the community but no concrete decisions or direction has been made yet.”

Washoe County: Washoe County, which recently approved an extension of its Emergency Rental Assistance Program after receiving $6.5 million in funds from the Treasury Department, is also looking at its options to provide pandemic assistance from ARPA funds.

“We don’t actually know how much we’ll receive or what the parameters are around how it can be spent yet,” said spokeswoman Bethany Drysdale.

For small businesses who need advice regarding their options for pandemic assistance, including how to put together an application for the various options available, the Nevada Small Business Development Center provides free advice and counseling. For more details, visit the Nevada SBDC website or call (800) 240-7094.

Jason Hidalgo covers business and technology for the Reno Gazette Journal, and also reviews the latest video games. Follow him on Twitter @jasonhidalgo. Like this content? Support local journalism with an RGJ digital subscription.

Continue Reading

Business

Schools closed, businesses damaged as unrest breaks out in Brooklyn Center following police shooting

becker blake

Published

on

Schools closed, businesses damaged as unrest breaks out in Brooklyn Center following police shooting

Residents, curious onlookers and business owners in Brooklyn Center emerged early Monday to begin cleaning up and to see for themselves the damage left behind after violence and looting broke out overnight following the fatal shooting of a motorist by police Sunday afternoon.

Officers in riot gear stood sentinel at the city’s police station that was tagged with anti-police graffiti and where squad cars were damaged. The National Guard blocked the entrance to the Shingle Creek Crossing shopping plaza where several retailers had windows busted out and merchandise strewn on the floor. Flip-flops and bottles of fruity drinks littered the Walmart parking lot where a man who gave his name as Thomas was part of a small army of store employees picking up trash and debris.

“All of our large screen TV’s were taken,” he said.

Alarms blared at a Verizon store across the way where the front window was broken and a TV was ripped off the wall. Looters had ransacked the Icon Beauty Salon and left boxes of fake eyelashes behind in the parking lot. At Aspen Dental, only the front door sustained damage, but the clinic canceled all Monday appointments.

“I expected it to be way worse,” said Sara Trout, an employee who was on the scene just before 7 a.m. even though she had received a text message telling her not to come to work.

A quiet yet tense feeling enveloped the Hennepin County suburb as law enforcement lifted an overnight curfew at 6 a.m. With fears that unrest could erupt again as police have scheduled an 11 a.m. media briefing, Brooklyn Center Community Schools told students to stay home and do distance learning.

“We know our community experienced trauma and we need the time and space to process,” said Superintendent Carly Baker.

Adam New, a 1999 Brooklyn Center High School graduate who does not live in the city anymore, took a city bus to his hometown Monday morning to check out the aftermath of Sunday night’s mayhem.

“They want to burn the place down,” New said as he watched patrols guard the police station. “I’m sick of it. This has to spark change.”

Scores of motorists with phones in hand took videos as they rolled by the station. Others, like Eric Cullen, of Bloomington, stopped by police headquarters to assess the situation and get a firsthand view rather than relying on media accounts of what happened.

“I’m a see-it-to-believe-it kind of guy,” he said.

Events unfolded Sunday afternoon when a police officer allegedly shot Daunte Wright, 20, during a traffic stop about 2 p.m. in the area of 63rd Avenue and Orchard Avenue N. Wright drove a few blocks before he crashed into another vehicle and died. Wright had a warrant for his arrest at the time.

The Bureau of Criminal Apprehension was on the scene and will conduct an independent investigation.

Protesters had assembled near the scene by Sunday afternoon and had been relatively peaceful until nightfall. That is when they marched to police headquarter near N. 66th Avenue and N. Humboldt Avenue and were locked in a standoff with police in riot gear. Police used tear gas, flash bangs and rubber bullets to disperse the crowd that had chanted Wright’s name and climbed atop the police headquarters sign.

On Monday, crime scene tape remained in yards near where the shooting happened. At the shopping complex, broken glass covered sidewalks and business owners surveyed the damage.

“Oh, they hit the Dominos and the Wing Stop,” Trout lamented. The manager of the pizza joint “is the nicest guy.”

The dental clinic where she works was largely spared. Other than broken glass, “nothing was stolen,” Trout said. “I’m not sad that it happened.”

Continue Reading

Trending